-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
WOOOT BARRACK OBAMA
- Thread starter chemical69
- Start date
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
I agree
I agree, with you two, but am hoping for the best. Talk about "The New Camelot" and comparisons to JFK and Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy make me want to projectile vomit, though.
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
Good Point
And Putin has Medvedev paving the way for him to return to the russian presidency for a six year instead of a four year term. Putin seems determined to carve a russian road to oil and the persian gulf.
It's gonna take a whle lot more than diplomacy, tap-dancing, sweet-talk, rhetoric, and a "less just all be friends" attitude---to be a sound, no tom-foolery leader of the Free World. I hope Obama has it in him. The time will likely present itself when he has to put his military foot down.
Iran is dying to nuke Israel, and Israel is dying to nuke Iran before it gets nuked.
And Putin has Medvedev paving the way for him to return to the russian presidency for a six year instead of a four year term. Putin seems determined to carve a russian road to oil and the persian gulf.
It's gonna take a whle lot more than diplomacy, tap-dancing, sweet-talk, rhetoric, and a "less just all be friends" attitude---to be a sound, no tom-foolery leader of the Free World. I hope Obama has it in him. The time will likely present itself when he has to put his military foot down.
tsst
Deuce is watching!
(thinking out loud)
I understand charisma, but there have been many charismatic people in our world's past that history has shown to not always be great world leaders. I have talked to people whose support of Obama borders on blind faith and some almost to the point of deification. This is a bit concerning for someone that is basically unproven.
I think to myself what am I missing.
He is a smooth talker like Clinton. He has only a few years as a community organizer and a couple years as a senator. Neither of which I consider a huge qualifying factor to leading the nation.
If a doctor told me he had a couple years experience and he wanted to be the surgeon general, I would have doubts. If a lawyer said she had a couple years experience and wanted to be the attorney general, I would have doubts. If a judge had only a couple years experience and wanted to be on the supreme court, I would have doubts. If a senator has a couple years experience wants to be president of the USA, I would have doubts.
I like the idea of change for the betterment. We all know at least some is needed, but may disagree on exactly what. He did make it tough to follow the change guise when he chose for his running mate the epitome of the same old thing, 36 year same old thing Joe Biden.
I am not trying to down play the significance of an African American being the president elect but in actuality he is just a democrat president elect. His skin color is only significant in the fact that he is the first, not in that it makes him a better person, candidate or president.
At this point he has proven only to be a great public speaker and a beginner senator. Being a great world leader or even an average one has yet to be realized. I would prefer to wait until he has actually done something to better our nation or beyond before anointing him the savior of the free world and frolic through our imagined utopia.
(just my $.01. In today's economy that's all I can afford. I will attempt to subsidize to $.02 when the promised economic prosperity arrives.)
I understand charisma, but there have been many charismatic people in our world's past that history has shown to not always be great world leaders. I have talked to people whose support of Obama borders on blind faith and some almost to the point of deification. This is a bit concerning for someone that is basically unproven.
I think to myself what am I missing.
He is a smooth talker like Clinton. He has only a few years as a community organizer and a couple years as a senator. Neither of which I consider a huge qualifying factor to leading the nation.
If a doctor told me he had a couple years experience and he wanted to be the surgeon general, I would have doubts. If a lawyer said she had a couple years experience and wanted to be the attorney general, I would have doubts. If a judge had only a couple years experience and wanted to be on the supreme court, I would have doubts. If a senator has a couple years experience wants to be president of the USA, I would have doubts.
I like the idea of change for the betterment. We all know at least some is needed, but may disagree on exactly what. He did make it tough to follow the change guise when he chose for his running mate the epitome of the same old thing, 36 year same old thing Joe Biden.
I am not trying to down play the significance of an African American being the president elect but in actuality he is just a democrat president elect. His skin color is only significant in the fact that he is the first, not in that it makes him a better person, candidate or president.
At this point he has proven only to be a great public speaker and a beginner senator. Being a great world leader or even an average one has yet to be realized. I would prefer to wait until he has actually done something to better our nation or beyond before anointing him the savior of the free world and frolic through our imagined utopia.
(just my $.01. In today's economy that's all I can afford. I will attempt to subsidize to $.02 when the promised economic prosperity arrives.)
Roy Munson
New member
The "Camelot" thing has always nauseated me, even in reference to the Kennedys. But comparisons between the Obamas and the Kennedys were inevitable. But heck, we can't blame the Obamas for these comparisons. If Dan Quayle can be forgiven for comparing HIMSELF to JFK, then I guess I won't hold it against BHO if other people compare HIM to JFK.
After 8 years of warrantless wire-tapping, habeas corpus suspensions, intelligence manipulation, war profiteering, and lies, I have no problem giving Obama the benefit of the doubt as far as trust goes. He'd have to screw up pretty badly to come anywhere near the utter failure of the Dubya administration.
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
Thanks
Excellent points and very well put. And ditto on the opening Camelot remark.
Nova_C
New member
Can you prove this? I know those two countries (and peoples!) have a long standing feud, but even during the cold war both the US and Russia were terrified of a nuclear holocaust. I don't believe it's any different for Iran and Israel.
ForkedTung
Serpent Mound Monk
So I guess the fact that we're involved in two wars presently isn't enough? We need to police the world? Trying to revert to less violent means to an ends isn't a viable solution? I guess it's easy for us to sit here comfortably at home and complain about gas prices and what a poor president elect we think we have when our soldiers are killing, dying, being maimed, etc... on a daily, DAILY basis but to think that that isn't enough and we need a president that is ready to " put his military foot down" again? How many wars would make you happy? The last thing we need is president that's ready to push the button at any moment? How about a little less blood ( afterall it's not likely to be literally on our hands) and a little more talk!
Last edited:
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Israel_relations
(The president of Iran, besides believing Israel has no right to exist, believes the Holocaust never occurred, and also believes there are zero homosexuals in Iran.)
We've been reading the long version in newspapers and on the internet since his election in 2006. There is too much proof of my clumsy distillation of the situation to put here.
Here's the simplified, distilled version in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Israel_relations
(The president of Iran, besides believing Israel has no right to exist, believes the Holocaust never occurred, and also believes there are zero homosexuals in Iran.)
We've been reading the long version in newspapers and on the internet since his election in 2006. There is too much proof of my clumsy distillation of the situation to put here.
Nova_C
New member
No, see, I know the history very well. I'm asking for proof that nuclear war between these two countries is inevitable, hell, even likely without a strong US leader standing between the two of them. I say again, the cold war represents the most hateful and paranoid two nuclear states have ever been to each other and no nuclear holocaust occurred.
Even to this day Americans remain astonishingly distrustful of anything remotely construed as communist to the point that socialism is commonly mistaken for it.
Even to this day Americans remain astonishingly distrustful of anything remotely construed as communist to the point that socialism is commonly mistaken for it.
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
Just backed up to check
2) I never expressed a thought or word on the Cold War either.
3) I did "imply" that a stable peacemaker between Iran and Israel would insure peace.
Knowing history is one thing, remembering it is another. Logic and relationships is another. Don't fall into the trap of tying unrelated things and your own inferences together to perpetuate an imagined or desired disagreement.
1) My statements were not in any military language. Nor did I even allude to an "inevitable" anything.
2) I never expressed a thought or word on the Cold War either.
3) I did "imply" that a stable peacemaker between Iran and Israel would insure peace.
Knowing history is one thing, remembering it is another. Logic and relationships is another. Don't fall into the trap of tying unrelated things and your own inferences together to perpetuate an imagined or desired disagreement.
Nova_C
New member
You said this:
And I asked for evidence that it was at all true. You have yet to provide any. I was using the cold war as an example of two nations with similar animosity for each other as Iran and Israel have and yet were not dying to nuke each other, even though both sides were terrified of the other's nuclear arsenal.
Basically, I called you on an assumption that you made to characterize a conflict that is vastly more complicated than you expressed and you skirted my challenge. And now you tell me than I'm imagining things? Just retract what you said since you seem to have no interest in defending it.
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
The US vs USSR compared to Iran vs Israel doesn't seem like a good analogy. That is because the people of the US and USSR, for the most part, didn't hate each other. They both feared the governments of the other country, and had very different political ideologies. But the core culture of the populations doesn't seem as divisive between our two countries as between the two middle eastern countries.
Israel and Iran's difficulties seem to stem from more core issues, such as religion, and the way that Israel was created. I am not saying that all Iranians hate all Israelis, or vice versa. But that the average person in those countries may feel more animosity towards each other than Americans and Russians.
I have spoken to many Russians and have visited there (and have a Russian sister in law and niece). But I have not had the same exposure to Iranians and Israelis - I am only guessing from what I have read over the past few years. The leader of Iran stated that Israel has no right to exist. Those differences seem to me much more difficult to bridge than those between the US and USSR, either during the cold war or now.
I do have to agree that our new President - elect is a smooth speaker - that will be a refreshing change from the last 8 years. I didn't vote for him. But now that we have him, I sure hope he is able to accomplish at least some of the progress he has promised. I can't imagine wanting that job, especially right now. He is inheriting a big mess - sure hope he is up to the huge job before him!
Israel and Iran's difficulties seem to stem from more core issues, such as religion, and the way that Israel was created. I am not saying that all Iranians hate all Israelis, or vice versa. But that the average person in those countries may feel more animosity towards each other than Americans and Russians.
I have spoken to many Russians and have visited there (and have a Russian sister in law and niece). But I have not had the same exposure to Iranians and Israelis - I am only guessing from what I have read over the past few years. The leader of Iran stated that Israel has no right to exist. Those differences seem to me much more difficult to bridge than those between the US and USSR, either during the cold war or now.
I do have to agree that our new President - elect is a smooth speaker - that will be a refreshing change from the last 8 years. I didn't vote for him. But now that we have him, I sure hope he is able to accomplish at least some of the progress he has promised. I can't imagine wanting that job, especially right now. He is inheriting a big mess - sure hope he is up to the huge job before him!
ForkedTung
Serpent Mound Monk
Thanks Kathy, As always a common sense post that is not only tempered with knowledge but optimistic as well.
vetusvates
Gamaliel's Principle
Standing by it
I made no foolish assumptions (your word).
And I am quite aware of the complications of international politics, young man.
"Dying to nuke" is an informal euphemism.
"Inevitable" is your word.
So is "proof" and "retraction".
This is not a battle. No loser. No winner.
I don't owe you proof, a retraction, or cowpoop.
Now stop making a fool out of yourself.
I never made, nor accepted a challenge.
I made no foolish assumptions (your word).
And I am quite aware of the complications of international politics, young man.
"Dying to nuke" is an informal euphemism.
"Inevitable" is your word.
So is "proof" and "retraction".
This is not a battle. No loser. No winner.
I don't owe you proof, a retraction, or cowpoop.
Now stop making a fool out of yourself.
Nova_C
New member
No you don't owe me anything. That's very true.
Kathy, I don't see a large difference between a religious or ethnic hatred such as the one between Iran and Israel and an ideological hatred such as what existed between the US and Russia before the fall of the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the world has ever come to nuclear war. There is no equivalent event that I know of between Iran and Israel.
No they are not the same, but I don't think ideological hatred is any less powerful or dangerous than religious hatred.
Kathy, I don't see a large difference between a religious or ethnic hatred such as the one between Iran and Israel and an ideological hatred such as what existed between the US and Russia before the fall of the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the world has ever come to nuclear war. There is no equivalent event that I know of between Iran and Israel.
No they are not the same, but I don't think ideological hatred is any less powerful or dangerous than religious hatred.
The_Thunderer
New member
Nova C...
I think what those "concerned" of us worry about is whether Obama can make the unpopular decisions. Granted... we're in a type of 2 front war right now... and the "popular" thing is to extricate ourselves out of this mess right now - something Barack has promised to do... which is also of concern.
Can he make the "unpopular" decisions? He has shown a "hesitation" or inability to make those decisions in the past. Take a look at his voting record in Illinois... there are so many times where he didn't vote... or just recorded "present". Not much of a voting record to go on.... "afraid" to do the unpopular?
Even pinning him down on whose taxes will go up - several numbers as high as $250,000 and as low as $75,000 were tossed up - where's the decisiveness?
A couple of BIG decisions is looming in how he handles Iran/Israel. How will our PE deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? How will he deal with an outbreak of hostility between Israel & Iran?
Another is how our PE will deal with Venezuela and the "tiny tyrant" over there (President Hugo Chavez)... or even the even smaller man in North Korea.
Then, there's BIG China... Whew... I'm glad I'm not in his shoes!!! LOL.
I and (I think) others believe in the "hard line"/pro-active approach. "Look, let's be civil... let's be friends. However, if you cross this line (wherever it may be), we will be forced to respond." What I think will happen (and others as well) is that our PE... who is "green" in this area... will be tested by "someone" doing something extreme first... and then have to deal from a position of weakness - being forced to be reactive as opposed to being pro-active. Even his running mate, Joe Biden predicted that Obama "will be tested in the first 6 months". I even believe he said "mark my words", but I can't find the direct quote for it, so I won't add that to the first.
I think what those "concerned" of us worry about is whether Obama can make the unpopular decisions. Granted... we're in a type of 2 front war right now... and the "popular" thing is to extricate ourselves out of this mess right now - something Barack has promised to do... which is also of concern.
Can he make the "unpopular" decisions? He has shown a "hesitation" or inability to make those decisions in the past. Take a look at his voting record in Illinois... there are so many times where he didn't vote... or just recorded "present". Not much of a voting record to go on.... "afraid" to do the unpopular?
Even pinning him down on whose taxes will go up - several numbers as high as $250,000 and as low as $75,000 were tossed up - where's the decisiveness?
A couple of BIG decisions is looming in how he handles Iran/Israel. How will our PE deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? How will he deal with an outbreak of hostility between Israel & Iran?
Another is how our PE will deal with Venezuela and the "tiny tyrant" over there (President Hugo Chavez)... or even the even smaller man in North Korea.
Then, there's BIG China... Whew... I'm glad I'm not in his shoes!!! LOL.
I and (I think) others believe in the "hard line"/pro-active approach. "Look, let's be civil... let's be friends. However, if you cross this line (wherever it may be), we will be forced to respond." What I think will happen (and others as well) is that our PE... who is "green" in this area... will be tested by "someone" doing something extreme first... and then have to deal from a position of weakness - being forced to be reactive as opposed to being pro-active. Even his running mate, Joe Biden predicted that Obama "will be tested in the first 6 months". I even believe he said "mark my words", but I can't find the direct quote for it, so I won't add that to the first.
Last edited:
Nova_C
New member
I agree with all of that Thunder, although I don't think that John McCain would be any less of a gamble. Neither one has ever acted as commander in chief and so both of them are big question marks. We will know soon enough.
But I wasn't arguing with any of that. I think there's enough unknowns in the world without inventing or exaggerating the thoughts and intentions of people who have yet to add their perspectives to our debate.
But I wasn't arguing with any of that. I think there's enough unknowns in the world without inventing or exaggerating the thoughts and intentions of people who have yet to add their perspectives to our debate.
tsst
Deuce is watching!
Just personal opinion, I view ideological hatred as being more calculated and thought driven and religious and ethnic hatred as being more emotional driven. Not making one any deeper than the other but one may be less stable than the other.
I thought Emanuel was Jewish?